alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
537 P.2d 976

#### In the Matter of the APPEAL IN MARICOPA COUNTY, JUVENILE ACTION NO. J-78070.

No. 1 CA-JUV 20.

Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division 1, Department B.

July 17, 1975.

*249Ross P. Lee, Maricopa County Public Defender by Anne Kappes, Deputy Public Defender, Phoenix, for appellant.

Moise E. Berger, Maricopa County Atty. by C. O. Lamp, Deputy County Atty., Phoenix, for appellee.

OPINION

HAIRE, Chief Judge.

The sole question presented in this appeal is whether the trial court abused its discretion by committing the juvenile to the State Department of Corrections. The juvenile contends that she “had no previous record with the juvenile court” and should have been granted probation.

The juvenile was adjudicated delinquent on the basis of the trial court’s finding that she had committed the public offense of assault with a deadly weapon (a knife) upon a police officer. In addition, the record shows that during the same incident she struck another officer with a board while he was attempting to assist the first officer. The record also indicates that this was not the first contact with the juvenile authorities by this 14 year old girl, since a previous incident involving her public intoxication had been referred to and adjusted by them. After the filing of the petition herein, an additional petition alleging incorrigability was filed shortly before the adjudication hearing. The juvenile also refused to be interviewed by her probation officer, repeatedly addressed her as a “M- F- pig” and assured her that “the judge ain’t going to do anything to me because this is my first time”, and her brothers, who had been in trouble many times, had never been committed. It is possible that such previous dispositions created and encouraged this juvenile’s disrespect for law and its enforcement personnel to the extent that she believed that she would escape any corrective action in spite of her admitted intention and attempt to stab a police officer who was engaged in the performance of his duties.

The disposition of a juvenile who has been adjudicated delinquent is within the discretion of the trial court under A. R.S. § 8-241 (A) (2), and one of the authorized dispositions is commitment to the State Department of Corrections. The trial court’s determination will not be interfered with in the absence of a showing of a clear abuse of discretion, which is completely absent here. Instead, the record amply supports the commitment. All the juvenile is really arguing is that every first offender must be given probation, no matter how aggravated the act forming the basis for the delinquency finding. This would leave no discretion to the trial judge, and the legislature has not provided for any such arbitrary rule.

The adjudication and disposition orders committing the juvenile are affirmed.

JACOBSON, P. J., and EUBANK, J., concur.
### SAT Report PMN Number: P-11-0327 SAT Date: 4/26/2011 Print Date: 8/3/2012

Related cases : Health related cases : Ecotox related cases:

Concern levels : Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments Level of Concern: 1-2 2

Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments 1 11

Exposure Based Review : Health: Yes Exposure based testing (health): May Fit HPV Category Ecotox: Yes
Routes of exposure : Health: Dermal Drinking Water Inhalation Ecotox: All releases to water Fate: ; Keywords : Keywords: SOLV IRR-E,S,L,GI SOLV NEURO SENS-S,L IMMUNO MUTA UNCERT ONCO AQUATOX-A,C
Summary of Assessment :

Fate : Fate Summary: P-11-0327 FATE: Estimations for typical MW 92 Liquid with MP = -94.9 C (M for typical) log Kow = 2.73 (M for typical)S = 526 mg/L at 25 C (M for typical) VP = 28.4 torr at 25 C (M for typical) BP = 21-538 C (M for mixture), 111 °C (M for typical) H = 6.64E-3 (E) log Koc = 2.37 (E) log Fish BCF = 1.47 (E) log Fish BAF = 1.58 (E) POTW removal (%) = 75 via sorption, stripping and biodeg Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg = wk Sorption to soils/sediments = moderate Volatilization half-life from a standard river = 1 hrs Volatilization half-life from a standard lake = 4 da Atmospheric Oxidation Half-life = 25 hr via OH radical PBT Potential: P1B1 *CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = moderate

Health : Health Summary: Absorption of some (unspecified) PMN constituents is good all routes, based on physical/chemical properties. There are concerns for solvent irritation and solvent neurotoxicity. There is also concern for dermal and respiratory sensitization, based on and information in the PMN MSDS. There are also concerns for immunotoxicity based on and mutagenicity based on There is also uncertain concern for oncogenicity based on

Ecotox :
Test Organism Test Type Test End Point Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 24 daphnid 48-h LC50 15 green algal 96-h EC50 8.7 fish

_ chronic value 2.6 daphnid

_ chronic value 1.8

algal

_ chronic value 3.6

Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50

_ Sewage Sludge

_ Chronic Value _

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for neutral organic chemicals; SAR chemical class = MW 92; log Kow = 2.54 (EPI), 2.73 (M, ); liquid with unknown mp (P); S = 530 mg/L at 25 C (P); p H7; effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients and mean measured concentrations; hardness <150.0 mg/L as CaCO3; andTOC <2.0 mg/L;

Factors Values Comments Assessment Factor 10 Concentration of Concern ( p pb) 180

SARs neutral organic chemicals SAR Class new chemicals category: neutral organics Ecotox Category

Ecotox Factors Comments:

SAT Chair: J. Kwiat
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 125 (Tuesday, June 30, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35640-35641]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17332]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

June 17, 1998.
    The Department of Treasury has submitted the following public 
information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-13. Copies of 
the submission(s) may be obtained by calling the Treasury Bureau 
Clearance Officer listed. Comments regarding this information 
collection should be addressed to the OMB reviewer listed and to the 
Treasury Department Clearance Officer, Department of the Treasury, Room 
2110, 1425 New York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220.

DATES: Written comments should be received on or before July 15, 1998 
to be assured of consideration.
    Special Request: In order to conduct the focus group interviews 
described below in a timely manner, the Department of the Treasury is 
requesting that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and 
approve this information collection by June 30, 1998. To obtain a copy 
of this study, please contact the Internal Revenue Service Clearance 
Officer at the address listed below.

Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

    OMB Number: 1545-1432.
    Project Number: M:SP:V 98-014-G.
    Type of Review: Revision.
    Title: Balance Due Return Focus Group Interviews.
    Description: There are two objectives of the focus groups:
    (1) To learn more about why taxpayers have insufficient withholding 
and estimated payments; and
    (2) To receive input from taxpayers and return prepares on what the 
Service can or should do about this situation.
    With this knowledge, we hope to improve IRS policies and 
procedures, reduce the burden balance due taxpayers face, and improve 
taxpayer satisfaction.
    Respondents: Individuals or households. Business or other for-
profit.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 96.
    Estimated Burden Hours Per Respondent:

[[Page 35641]]



Screening process........................  5 minutes.                   
Focus group interviews...................  2 hours.                     
Travel time..............................  1 hour.                      
                                                                        

    Frequency of Response: Other (one time only).
    Estimated Total Reporting Burden: 256 hours.
    Clearance Officer: Garrick Shear (202) 622-3869, Internal Revenue 
Service, Room 5571, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20224.
    OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt (202) 395-7860, Office of 
Management and Budget, Room 10226, New Executive Office Building, 
Washington, DC 20503.
Lois K. Holland,
Departmental Reports, Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 98-17332 Filed 6-29-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 133 (Monday, July 13, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 37624]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18560]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY


Art Objects; Importation for Exhibition: Ancient West Mexico: Art 
and Archaeology of the Unknown Past

AGENCY: United States Information Agency.

SUBJECT: Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985, 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978 
(43 FR 133359, March 29, 1978), and Delegation Order No. 85-5 of June 
27, 1985 (50 FR 27393, July 2, 1985).

ACTION: I hereby determine that the objects to be included in the 
exhibit, ``Ancient West Mexico: Art and Archaeology of the Unknown 
Past'' imported from abroad for the temporary exhibition without profit 
within the United States, are of cultural significance. These objects 
are imported pursuant to a loan agreement with the foreign lenders. I 
also determine that the exhibition or display of the listed exhibit 
objects at The Art Institute of Chicago, Chicago, IL, from on or about 
September 5, 1998 through November 22, 1998, and Los Angeles County 
Museum of Art, Los Angeles, CA, from on or about December 20, 1998 to 
March 29, 1999 is in the national interest. Public Notice of these 
determinations is ordered to be published in the Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Neila Sheahan, Assistant General Counsel, Office of the General 
Counsel, 202/619-5030, and the address is Room 700, U.S. Information 
Agency, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547-0001.

    Dated: July 7, 1998.
Les Jin,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 98-18560 Filed 7-10-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8230-01-M
### IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE June 19, 2001 Session STATE OF TENNESSEE v. DONALD J. MOORE Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Coffee County No. 29,824F John W. Rollins, Judge

No. M2000-02621-CCA-R3-CD - Filed August 7, 2001

T HOMAS T. W OODALL , J., dis senting.
I respectfully dissent from th e majority opinion in this case. Fi rst , I am compelle d to note that there is not a transcript of the guilty plea hearing in the re cord. It is well settled that when a defendant appeals a sentencing issue and fails to provide a transcript of the guilty plea

hearing in

the record, that this court presumes that the action of the trial court was correct. See State v. Keen , 996 S.W.2d 842, 844 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999); State v. Griffis , 964 S.W.2d 577, 592-93 (T enn. Crim. App. 1997).

In addition, even if the transcript of the guilty plea heari ng had not been omitted, I respectfully conclude that if the judgment of the trial court must be rever sed, the matter

should be r emanded to give the trial c

ourt the opportunit

y to state on t

he record why

he denie d judicia

l diversion. See State v. Herron , 767 S.W.2d 151, 156 (Tenn. 1989) (requiring a tr ial court to clear

ly state on the record its specific reasons for denying judicial diversion, in order to allow for meaningful appellate review); see also , State v. Hammersley , 650 S.W.2d 352, 355 (Ten n. 1983); State v. Bonestel , 871 S.W.2d 163,168 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1993), overruled on other grounds by State v. Hooper , 29 S.W.3d 1, 9 (Tenn. 2000). Whether an accused shoul

d be granted jud

icial diversion is a question which addresses itself to the sound discretion of the trial court. Bonestel , 871 S.W.2d at 168. This court will not interfere with the refusal of the trial court to grant judicial diversion if there is “any substantial evidence to support the refusal contained in the record.” Id. When the trial court errs by failing to state on the record his reasons for deny ing judicial diversion, the matter should be reman ded for clarification by the trial court. For this court to grant judicial diversion i n thi s particular cas e, without a remand to the trial court, would be substituting our discretion for the discretion of the

trial court.

__________________________________________ THOMAS T. WOODALL, JUDGE
# C_2015138EN.01002001.xml

| 27.4.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 138/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.4.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 138/20

---

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 26 February 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione — Italy) — Ministero delle Politiche agricole, alimentari e forestali v Federazione Italiana Consorzi Agrari Soc. coop. arl — Federconsorzi, admitted to a collective insolvency procedure known as ‘concordato preventivo’, Liquidazione giudiziale dei beni ceduti ai creditori della Federazione Italiana Consorzi Agrari Soc. coop. arl — Federconsorzi

(Case C-104/14) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Third paragraph of Article 288 TFEU - Combating late payments in commercial transactions - Directive 2000/35/EC - Articles 2, 3 and 6 - Directive 2011/7/EU - Articles 2, 7 and 12 - Legislation of a Member State capable of modifying, to the detriment of a creditor of the State, the interest on a debt predating those directives))

(2015/C 138/26)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Corte suprema di cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Ministero delle Politiche agricole, alimentari e forestali

Appellant:

Respondents: Federazione Italiana Consorzi Agrari Soc. coop. arl — Federconsorzi, admitted to a collective insolvency procedure known as ‘concordato preventivo’, Liquidazione giudiziale dei beni ceduti ai creditori della Federazione Italiana Consorzi Agrari Soc. coop. arl — Federconsorzi

Respondents:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The third paragraph of Article 288 TFEU and Articles 3(3) and 6 of Directive 2000/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 June 2000 on combating late payment in commercial transactions and Articles 7 and 12 of Directive 2011/7/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 on combating late payment in commercial transactions must be interpreted as not precluding a Member State which has made use of the option under Article 6(3)(b) of Directive 2000/35 from adopting, during the period prescribed for transposition of Directive 2011/7, legislative provisions, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, which are capable of modifying, to the detriment of a creditor of the State, the interest on a debt arising out of the performance of a contract concluded before 8 August 2002.

---

(1)  OJ C 184, 16.6.2014.

1

---
No. 10-7135.

#### Shamsuddin Sikander, Petitioner v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General.

562 U.S. 1146, 131 S. Ct. 920,

178 L. Ed. 2d 767,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 431.

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.

Same case below, 376 Fed. Appx. 179.
**DAAN-46-01**

**Production Lot Testing (Government)**

(September 2016)

Production Lot Test (PLT)

1 EACH = 1 PLT

Number of units to be tested:  _______

For Testing:

Inspection: Origin

Ship To (Lab DoDAAC):  ________

Ship To (Lab Address): __________  

Acceptance (Issuing Activity DoDAAC):  ________

Delivery Schedule:

____ Days:  Completion of Production Units 

  10   Days:  Shipping of Production Lot to Government 

____ Days:  PLT Test Time

____ Days:  Government PLT Report Evaluation and Notification to Contractor 

____________________________________

____ Total Days ARO

All transportation charges incurred in the submission and return of any production lot sample shall be borne by the Contractor. The sample shall be packaged and marked in accordance with the item description when the sample is shipped to the testing facility. 

(End of Notice)
AMENDMENT TO WARRANT

     This AMENDMENT TO WARRANT (this "Amendment"), made as of the 3rd day of
December, 1996, by and between THE TITAN CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation
("Titan"), and CORPORATE PROPERTY ASSOCIATES 9, L.P., A DELAWARE LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP, a Delaware limited partnership ("CPA: 9").

W I T N E S S E T H

WHEREAS, Titan issued to CPA:9 that certain Warrant, dated as of July 9, 1991
(the "Warrant"), pursuant to which CPA:9 was granted the right to purchase
18,540 shares of Common Stock of Titan; and

WHEREAS, Titan and CPA:9 have agreed to amend the Warrant as hereinafter set
forth.

NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Titan and CPA:9 covenant and
agree as follows:

1.  The Warrant is hereby amended by deleting the definition of Exercise Price
appearing in Article I and inserting the following definition in lieu thereof:

"Exercise Price" means $3.50 per share, as such price may be adjusted pursuant
to ARTICLE IV.

2.  This Amendment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the
laws of the State of New York.

3.  Except as specifically amended by this Amendment, the terms and conditions
of the Warrant shall remain in full force and effect and shall be binding upon
Titan and its successors and assigns and inure to the benefit of CPA:9 and its
successors and assigns.

4.  This Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts and by the
different parties hereto on separate counterparts each of which, when so
executed, shall be deemed an original, but all such counterparts shall
constitute but one and the same instrument.

  WITNESS the due execution hereof the day and year first above written.

THE TITAN CORPORATION



By: __/s/ Philip J. Englund


Title: _Sr. V.P., Gen. Counsel

CORPORATE PROPERTY
ASSOCIATES 9, L.P., A DELAWARE
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP



By: ___Ninth Carey Corporate Property, Inc., its Managing General Partner
By:  /s/ Barclay G. Jones

Title: _Executive Vice President
**AP8.13. APPENDIX 8.13**

**DISPOSAL RELEASE ORDER, FOLLOW-UP, OR CANCELLATION**

**DoD 4000.25-1-M**

*DoD 4000.25-1-M, January, 2006*

*Change 1*

*DLM 4000.25, Volume 2, November 26, 2019*

*Change 13*

3

APPENDIX 3.13

AP8.13-1

APPENDIX 8.13
No. 10-1361.

#### Nona Ray, Petitioner v. City of Chicago, Illinois, et al.

565 U.S. 818, 132 S. Ct. 100,

181 L. Ed. 2d 28,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6673.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.

Same case below, 629 F.3d 660.
No. 10-6135.

#### Leslie Charles Cohen, Petitioner v. Dudley Terrell, Warden, et al.

562 U.S. 1106, 131 S. Ct. 848,

178 L. Ed. 2d 554,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9647.

December 13, 2010.

Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 12, 2015

No. 04-14-00896-CV

Hugo ALANIZ,

Appellant

v.

Jose Maria AGUIRRE, Elias Aguirre Jr., Argelio Aguirre, Jose Guadalupe Aguirre, and Elsa A. 

Lara,

Appellees

From the 381st Judicial District Court, Starr County, Texas

Trial Court No. DC-09-71

Honorable Jose Luis Garza, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

 We grant appellant’s motion for extension of time and order appellant’s brief 

due July 13, 2015 (81 days after the original deadline). Appellant is advised that no 

further extensions of time will be granted and the appeal is subject to being dismissed if 

the brief is not filed by the date ordered.

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 12th day of June, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
No. 10-10244.

#### Constantino Barragan-Diaz, aka Ulices Barragan-Diaz, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 832, 132 S. Ct. 131,

181 L. Ed. 2d 52,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5685.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 408 Fed. Appx. 862.
#### *Seth Burrill Prods., Inc., Respondent, v. Rebel Creek Tackle, Inc., Petitioner,*

No. 92085-1.

Petition for review of a decision of the Court of Appeals, No. 32119-3-III, July 7, 2015, 188 Wn. App. 1044. *Denied*January 6, 2016.
# Rico F. 的故事及傳記

English (英語)Español(西班牙語)Korean (韓語)Vietnamese (越南語)

Print

Minus

              - Rico F. 的傳記

Rico,現年 48 歲,14 歲已開始吸煙。他記得小時候為父親點煙,並看著他不停地吸煙。Rico 一直吸煙至成年,雖然醫生叫他戒煙,但他承認這是很困難的事。「我真的戒不了。」他說。

在 45 歲時,Rico 的醫生告訴他他患有癌症。突然間,一切都變得不再重要。Rico 意識到自己必須立即採取行動,永久戒煙。Rico 戒煙是為了保持身體健康,以及看著自己當時十幾歲的孩子長大成人。他接受了癌症治療,從 2011 年起成為倖存者。

Rico 記得自己最初是如何為戒煙而掙扎,但同時為自己能掌控健康及成功戒煙感到自豪。「成功戒煙,我對太太和子女來說就不單只是一個回憶。」他說。Rico 喜歡與其他人分享自己的故事,並相信要戒煙及重過健康生活是永遠不會太遲的。

### Rico F. 的傳記

----

Rico,現年 48 歲,14 歲已開始吸煙。作為一名高中生,他可以接觸煙草,全因父親是吸煙者。「我爸爸會叫我為他點煙,而我就會在遞煙給他前先吸幾口。我爸爸當時會笑,這的確鼓勵了我去吸煙。」Rico 說。不知不覺,他已吸煙成癮。

Rico 一直吸煙至成年,因為他大部分朋友都是煙民,所以香煙垂手可得。然後,他經歷了人生的不幸。「我爸爸死於肝癌,但這並沒有給我敲響警鐘,所以我一直在吸煙。我的醫生叫我戒煙,但我充耳不聞。我已經吸煙成癮了。」

Rico 在 45 歲時開始有生病的感覺。儘管他感到不舒服,他還是繼續吸煙。在活體組織檢查中(在顯微鏡下檢查人體細胞的測試)顯示 Rico 患有癌症。他和他的家人頓時崩潰了。

除了身體康復需時,情緒上的復元亦是一個漫長且充滿挑戰的過程。「那是一段非常艱難的時期。我變得抑鬱,因為我失業了,並需要很長時間才能康復。我病到無法工作,並因為付不起房貸而失去了房子。我們失去了所擁有的一切。」他說。Rico 知道自己需要額外支援,因此在手術後,他搬到加州鄰近自己的姊妹。

在抵達加州後,Rico 太太找到了一份護士工作,而他大部分時間亦會獨自一人。「我不斷學習,並在網上找工作。當我在手術後患上抑鬱症時,太太對於我創業和管理公司的能力有很多積極的想法,給予我很多鼓勵。」他說。

為了對抗抑鬱症,Rico 專注於個人發展及領導技巧。他最終創辦了兩家公司。「我目前在一家居家護理公司擔任首席執行官(CEO),並在一間職業學校擔任行政總監,負責管理營運。」他說。

在所有成就中,Rico 感到最自豪的就是他承諾戒煙,並堅持戒斷。「當我發現自己得了癌症時,我就戒了煙。我只想保持健康,並能看著我的孩子們長大成人,」他說。

Rico 是一名癌症倖存者,他熱衷於分享自己的故事及教育他人有關吸煙對健康的影響。於 2013 年,他開始為在加州奧克蘭一間非牟利機構工作,並成為旗下計劃中一名協助他人戒煙的義工。「作為一名前吸煙者,我知道戒煙有多難。成癮是一場非常難以取勝的戰鬥,但絕非不可能!」Rico 說,自從自己戒煙後,與太太和子女在一起的時間就變的更珍貴了。「現在,我已成功戒煙,隨著子女成長,我可以成為他們生活的一部分。」

頁頂

### 更多有關 Rico F. 之英文版本

----

Print AdRico F.’s Tip [PDF – 714KB]

頁頂

### 額外資源之英文版本

----

Ready to Quit?FREE Tips & Tools to help you quit.

5 Ways Quitlines Help YOU SucceedQuitlines provide free coaching--over the phone--to help quit smoking.

quitSTART appThe quitSTART app is a free smartphone app that helps you quit smoking with tailored tips and inspiration.

頁頂

### 更多相關故事之英文版本

----

更多有關戒煙真實故事之英文版本:

Meet Beatrice R.

Meet James F.

Meet Tiffany R.

Meet Wilma S.

頁頂

July 26, 2023
Office on Smoking and HealthNational Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health PromotionCenters for Disease Control and Prevention

- Facebook
- Twitter
- LinkedIn
- Syndicate